Cross-Model Semantics in Representation Learning
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
The internal representations learned by deep networks are often sensitive to architecture-specific choices, raising questions about the stability, alignment, and transferability of learned structure across models. In this paper, we investigate how structural constraints--such as linear shaping operators and corrective paths--affect the compatibility of internal representations across different architectures. Building on the insights from prior studies on structured transformations and convergence, we develop a framework for measuring and analyzing representational alignment across networks with distinct but related architectural priors. Through a combination of theoretical insights, empirical probes, and controlled transfer experiments, we demonstrate that structural regularities induce representational geometry that is more stable under architectural variation. This suggests that certain forms of inductive bias not only support generalization within a model, but also improve the interoperability of learned features across models. We conclude with a discussion on the implications of representational transferability for model distillation, modular learning, and the principled design of robust learning systems.
Key facts. Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 29 of its 33 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 5 Aug 2025.
Builds on
29 of 33 references.
References · 29
- 2022Git Re-Basin: Merging Models modulo Permutation Symmetriescited by 471
- 2024The Platonic Representation Hypothesiscited by 382
- 2022Relative representations enable zero-shot latent space communicationcited by 191
- 2023Getting aligned on representational alignmentcited by 143
- 2023How Do Transformers Learn Topic Structure: Towards a Mechanistic Understandingcited by 86
- 2022Human alignment of neural network representationscited by 74
- 2022On the Symmetries of Deep Learning Models and their Internal Representationscited by 64
- 2023Text-To-Concept (and Back) via Cross-Model Alignmentcited by 64
- 2025Universal Sparse Autoencoders: Interpretable Cross-Model Concept Alignmentcited by 62
- 2023Latent Space Translation via Semantic Alignmentcited by 52
- 2023Rosetta Neurons: Mining the Common Units in a Model Zoocited by 46
- 2022The Neural Race Reduction: Dynamics of Abstraction in Gated Networkscited by 37
17 more
- 2024Tracing Representation Progression: Analyzing and Enhancing Layer-Wise Similaritycited by 36
- 2023Equivariant Deep Weight Space Alignmentcited by 35
- 2025Understanding the Emergence of Multimodal Representation Alignmentcited by 31
- 2023From Bricks to Bridges: Product of Invariances to Enhance Latent Space Communicationcited by 21
- 2025Optimizers Qualitatively Alter Solutions And We Should Leverage Thiscited by 17
- 2024When Representations Align: Universality in Representation Learning Dynamicscited by 10
- 2023Controlling the Inductive Bias of Wide Neural Networks by Modifying the Kernel's Spectrumcited by 9
- 2023Expressive Monotonic Neural Networkscited by 7
- 2024Towards Exact Computation of Inductive Biascited by 5
- 2025Towards a Learning Theory of Representation Alignmentcited by 5
- 2025Teasing Apart Architecture and Initial Weights as Sources of Inductive Bias in Neural Networkscited by 5
- 2025Connecting Neural Models Latent Geometries with Relative Geodesic Representationscited by 4
- 2025Model Alignment Searchcited by 3
- 2025Multimodal Representation Alignment for Cross-modal Information Retrievalcited by 2
- 2025Structured Transformations for Stable and Interpretable Neural Computationcited by 2
- 2024Latent Functional Maps: a spectral framework for representation alignmentcited by 1
- 2025Understanding Learning Dynamics Through Structured Representationscited by 1
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 2.
2 papers.